Conflict of Interest in the Green Movement

Recently seen in upstate New York: a bumper sticker on a car that says “Ban all hydrofracking.” It’s a rather ironic statement since the driver of that car has undoubtedly filled up at the gas station many times.

The relevant question, then, is how often does the average American use fracked oil and natural gas?

The answer is pretty striking: Fracking is now responsible for 50% of all domestic oil production, and 67% of all domestic natural gas production.

Thus, it’s pretty likely that the average American driver has filled up with cheap, fracked oil many times.

While that may seem like an inconvenient truth, here’s another quirk of the recent U.S. energy boom: President Obama has been taking credit for the low gasoline prices that Americans are currently enjoying.

In a July 5, 2016, speech, the president said: “Remember when we were all concerned about our dependence on foreign oil? Well, let me tell you—we’ve cut the amount of oil we buy from other countries in half. Remember when the other team was promising they were going to get gas prices down in like 10 years? We did it.”

President Obama is correct. Gasoline prices have fallen dramatically in recent years. But the primary reason for this cheaper gas is the shale oil provided by hydraulic fracturing.

It’s strange that the president would claim credit for these lower prices since he’s presided over a continuing decline in oil production on federal lands. And the fracking that actually provides cheaper oil has largely taken place on private and state lands—outside of federal control.

The reason all of this matters is because Americans rely on a high-energy economy to provide the resources for safer, healthier living. Robust electricity generation in the nation’s power plants is what drives the treatment and delivery of clean drinking water, the transit and remediation of sewage and waste, and the medical care that cures illnesses and save lives. Without plentiful, affordable energy, America’s current standard of living would decline precipitously.

Thus the conflict of interest displayed on a bumper sticker advocating an end to fracking. Indeed, one way to end fracking would be to boycott oil—by never driving a car. But until activists make such a commitment, it’s hard to see the logical consistency in their argument.

Related

Leave a comment (newest first):

Comments (5)

4TimesAYear

Nothing says “pollution” like all those bumper stickers on that vehicle. And it’s not just about filling up the vehicle, but what the stickers are made of…haven’t seen one yet that’s not made of plastic 😉

Amazon Kindle tablets are known for their world-class features and amazing support. If you own a Kindle device and looking for the best Amazon Kindle Support, then you have to Call Toll-Free No. +1844-305-0086 for any assistance.

Get a daily digest of the day’s headlines

Recent Comments

Aido

It gets even more dodgy. The ‘anomalies’ are differences from a 30-year average, referred to as the ‘norm’.. 1930-1960, then 1960-1990, which is the current ‘norm’. If you took 1940-1970, or 1950-1980 as the ‘norm’, you’d get different figures. How anyone falls for this beats me.

Amber

Ricky C
About 60 million voters would likely agree with you . Some people like to rescue pit bulls to because they figure they can “fix ‘ them .
Donald Trump doesn’t need one of his top enemies buttering up his daughter
to help sell a scary global warming scam .
Gore , Podesta , and Steyer are the best of pals and would love nothing more than to have a direct pipeline into Trump to help bring him down . Stating the obvious ,
they mean him absolutely no good and will do every thing they can to wreck his Presidency one way or the other .
Lets hope Ivanka dedicates her influence and smarts to help real people and solve real problems .
Stein got 1 % of the vote for a reason . The global warming con game is over .

amirlach

Ricky C

She better not. Just like its said, everyone worked very hard, myself particularly to get the waste out of the “Climate Change” feeding trough for consultants who do nothing for the economy. If I want to make sure my medical supplies at a local hospital in third world countries that I visit are modern and effective, their economy has to be booming, not cut down by giving money to international Climate Change hustlers.

JayPee

Dale

I don’t know whether or not Tim Ball actually made the above posting but if so, it’s in very poor taste and severely weakens his potential as a climate authority. Spamming web sites (I’ve seen this several times before on other sites) is not the way to gather interest or respect. People usually ignore such spam and laugh it off as just another fly-by-night.
I’ve read many of Tim Ball’s articles and have heard him speak via video. He has too much to offer to stoop to this low level nonsense, if this posting is indeed from Tim Ball.